Thursday, March 22, 2007

If 2 heads are better than 1, than surely 112 heads are more than spectacular. One hundred and twelve crazy people readers voted in the (first annual?) year in advance Oscar Actress Psychic contest. Nine months later they'll find out who made the most beautiful prediction baby. Ballot details can be read here.

But the collectively created Oscar nomination prediction is...

[drumroll please]

Cate Blanchett (The Golden Age)

Julie Christie (Away From Her)

Angelina Jolie (A Mighty Heart)

Nicole Kidman (Margot at the Wedding)

Natalie Portman (The Other Boleyn Girl)

Cate Blanchett's second take on Queen Elizabeth was the only performance on more than 50% of the submitted ballots. Christie's alzheimer's patient and Kidman's wedding guest both found a home on a third of all ballots, way ahead of the pack. Jolie's war journalism widow & Portman as Queen's Elizabeth's mom just barely made the collective five wide shortlist, pulling ahead of four women, two of whom are already Oscar winners...

That top 5 is very fanboyish. Jolie+Kidman+Portman+Blanchett? It cannot be true. A Mighty Heart's June release date disturbs me, I think it will be long forgotten by Oscar time. I guess people assumed Connelly was supporting? I think Reservation Road will hit big, and people who have read the book say she is as much of a lead as Pheonix.

4 of the top 5 are in my predix...I chose Anne Hathaway instead of Angelina just becuase Anne has more "plusses" on her side (It will be her first nomination, the movie will be relesed in the fall/winter...) but I was about to pick Angie until I found out that the release date for a 'MIGHTY HEART' is in June or July and I knew it could happen but it would hurt her chances...oh, well...And thanks, Nat...

Nat, are you gonna post the 5 picks for each person so we can at least see how we are doing with the points???? It could be easy if you just put the attachment of the excel sheet online and we can each download it and open it...

I'm VERY surprised Streep didn't place higher. She seemed the easiest choice to me. Streep + Redford + prestige film = DUH. Plus, she is boiling over with goodwill right now. Everyone LOVES her, and she's coming off the very-well-received Prada and Adaptation, for which she lost.

The only thing against her, I think, is that she has even MORE oscary projects ahead in 2008 - that will probably be her year - and I doubt people will want to nominate her yet again for a role that can't net her the statue. But then she does just keep racking up those noms, and has already lost 10 times in a row. So what's one more loss? I'm sure she doesn't care at this point.

I don't see how she misses unless it somehow ends up being a supporting role.

Blanchett obviously is the other "duh" choice, but it's entirely possible that she won't make it. It is a sequel after all. Acting noms for sequels are not likely. In order to get one, she may have to top her perf in the first film, and that'll be hard.

By the way Nath, what were the lowest and highest predictions for the tiebreaker guesswork?

(I really wanted to vote for Sarandon but Doris & Bernard is supposedly having distribution problems so I hesitated. I chose Paquin as this year's Kate Winslet. I think Keener could do a Misery-type of nomination at least.)

ok nathaniel, I'm martin again, I already send it back again... I hope you receive it this time... If not well, I'll play from my house... It's just that I feel so confident about my predictios (or at least I wold love to see that happening).

Adam K-Streep was my sixth choice, but I figured that she'd go supporting for that one for some reason, so I went with Fonda instead (it could turn out to be that they both go supporting, who knows?)

Nathaniel-This is exciting! I can't wait to see how this plays out (particularly if there's a Best Actress nominee that not even 112 people can predict-proving that at a year in advance, it's like throwing darts blindfolded). I'm also excited that three of my predix are listed in the Top 5.

Ja, In my entire early bird predictions I have Sarandon down as a Supporting Actress prediction for In the Valley of Elah.

John T, don't even consider the prospect of there being someone who's not on there. It is possible that a foreign one could come along (in the Catalina Sandino Moreno vein). Cannes will tell us if there's any foreign film that has an early chance of breaking out (as we saw with Volver and Pan's Labyrinth last year).

I think Kidman is going to be in the frame for a double nomination this year. Margot At The Wedding sounds promising for a Best Actress nom, but I actually think her best chance of a nomination will be in the Best Supporting Actress catergory. It's hard to envision Kidman not knocking an ice cold bitch like Mrs Coulter in The Golden Compass, out of the park.

Margot At The Wedding could be one of those little oddities that critics don't support or doesn't find an audience (ie The Life Aquatic, Birth, The Good German ect). I'm more confident of Kidman getting in for The Golden Compass.

This was one of my favourite books of the late 90's (how favourite? I remember being ticked off when The Hours beat it for The Pulitzer Prize. That said, I haven't read it in years, so if you have a correction, please make it

The narrative follows two tracks. The first track is of the Learner family (Joaquin Phoenix and Jennifer Connelly are the husband/wife; Elle Fanning is their daughter and Sean Curley plays their son) as they learn to deal with the MEGA FUCKING SPOILER death of their son (Curley's character - named Josh Learner) from a hit and run. In terms of bait, it's Phoenix's story first, Connelly's next and Fanning's last (she's clearly supporting and yeah, the potential for bait is there: she gets a scene where she blames herself for the accident. It's heartbreaking to read). The main thrust comes from their struggle with grief (obviously), with a second really moving thread coming from the difficulty of trying to parent in such a situation.

The second track comes from Dwight Arno (Mark Ruffalo). He's in a shitty relationship with his ex-wife (played by Sorvino) and is struggling to have a better one with his son. He's a bit of a sadsack type character... anyway, he's the one who hits (and kills) Josh Learner.

If Ruffalo is pushed supporting, it'll be more like Blanchett's situation (where she was a leading character but if you could only choose one lead, you'd choose Dench) as opposed to McAvoy or Foxx in Collateral (where they were inarguably THE leading character and suggesting otherwise would drive one to embolism), but as I see it

Lead: Phoenix, RuffaloBorderline: Connelly (it really depends on how they adapt the story: she could easily fade a bit)Supporting: Sorvino, Fanning.

Nat, I haven't read the book and it seems like Arkaan clearly knows more than I do. I was just guessing. I doubt they'd stick both Phoenix and Ruffalo into Lead, and if there are three women (Connelly, Sorvino and Fanning) gunning for Supporting, they'd probably bump one up to Lead (Connelly). Yeah, I was just using common sense, but obviously it's too early to tell.

Wouldn't it be hilarious if ELLE Fanning got an Oscar nod before Dakota. I think the world would spin off it's axis.

I am pleasantly surprised I am the only one with a vote of confidence in Miss Alba. I have faith she will play a blind woman as we've never seen before. If the character is anything like the original "The Eye," it will be a challenging dual role for her. (After "The Departed," the Academy are gonna be suckers for HK-remakes!)

Her newfound hobbies are "turning down roles" and telling studio bosses to kiss her a--. Clearly she is doing this because she is following the footsteps of Rachel McAdams and being very selective what roles she takes.

The sleeping giant has awaken and her name is Jessica Alba, Oscar nominee 2008.

I wished you guys had the option to change your predictions. Good luck! :)

I am a little surprised at the relief and/or self-congratuatory tone with which some in this thread are noting how many of their choices match the 'top five' consensus. The more years that pass, the more convinced I become of the wisdom of the oft-quoted first rule of Oscar prognostication - "Nobody Knows Anything". Note that Nathaniel's April Fool's predictions last year included (as memory serves) Beyonce Knowles and Nicole Kidman for roles that did not succeed, and Ashley Judd for a movie that was not even released in 2006. That latter problem could do in a lot of folks in this contest, as Nathaniel has already noted (and, having backed Judd this year in "Bug" as he did last year, I am all too aware.) In my humble opinion, the closer you are to the consensus, the less likely you are to be successful in this contest.

In my case, I have only one actress in the consensus on my list, and not for the consensus role (Natalie Portman in "Goya's Ghost"). I figure that her role in "The Other Boleyn Girl" is likely supporting (the other high-risk factor that could wipe out a lot of lists). And I have difficulty seeing the Academy giving Cate a second bite of the apple for a role they already nominated her for once, even if they did so for Al Pacino's Michael Corleone. It would have to be 'out of the park' better than everyone else, and this category has been pretty competitive lately.

You heard it here first...your contest winners will not have more than two consensus picks on their lists, and I would be even less surprised to see the winner have none.

carl, I tend to agree with the fact that "nobody knows anything" and the likelihood of a serious match with the consensus is minimal. I procrastinated predicting and ended up forgetting, so I'm not actually playing, but I'd argue that best actress is actually far more consistent than most other categories. First off, in terms of competition, I think last year was an anomaly. 2005 was a weaker year for oscar style performances, 2004 was fairly good, 2003 was weak again, etc.

I'm a bit surprised that there are those dismissing Blanchett's chances because it has happened only once (twice if you count O'Toole) before. There was a very consistent outcry when she lost in 98 and the feeling that she was robbed then hasn't really dissipated. But moreso, how many performers really return to oscar nominated roles in sequels? Oscar nominated films (in major categories) aren't exactly sequel whores.

Anyone wanna make a list?

I can think of Jack Nicholson (Chinatown, The Two Jakes), Al Pacino (The Godfather I and II), Peter O'Toole (Becket, The Lion in Winter), Anthony Hopkins (The Silence of the Lambs, Hannibal), James Cromwell (Babe and Pig in the City), Ian McKellan (LOTR films--hedging a bit, I know)

And you're totally right about consensus being not necessarily promising in terms of Oscar this far out.

For example. I was the only major pundit that I know of last year that did not predict FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS in their first lineup and along with Dreamgirls it was considered the shoo-in. famously neither of the top two consensus choices made it.